كثيرة هي الصدامات التي تدور بين رئيس ومرؤوسه سواء كان هذا الرئيس رئيس مؤسسة أو دولة، وهناك العديد من الأسباب التي تؤدي لحدوث مثل هذا الصدام، غير أن مجملها يدور عن كونه اختلافاً في الرؤى ووجهات النظر بينهما، غير أن هناك عاملاً أساسياً قد يضخم هذه الصراعات ويسهم في إيصالها لنقطة اللاعودة، وهو طبيعة شخصية كل منهما وطموحه الشخصي، فقد تدفع الطموحات العالية بصاحبها لزجِّه في صراعات لن يخسر منها سواه.
في الدول الحزبية كالولايات المتحدة وغيرها، التي تكون الغلبة فيها للحزب الفائز في الانتخابات، تُفرض العديد من القيود على الرئيس المنتخب، وهي القيود التي فرضها الواقع والوعود الانتخابية التي قطعها على نفسه، ويزداد هذا الأمر صعوبة في دولة كالولايات المتحدة التي يتحكم فيها الكونجرس (والحزب المسيطر عليه) في عملية صناعة القرار، فالرئيس في الولايات المتحدة يحتاج لرفاق حزبه لدعمه من أجل تمرير بعض قراراته الرئاسية، وهو ما يصعب الأمور على أي رئيس أمريكي خلال عملية إدارته لشؤون البلاد.
لا شك أن أعضاء الإدارة والحكومة الأمريكية لديهم رؤى متباينة قد تتفق وتختلف في ما بينهم، غير أن الرأي الفصل في ترجيح رأي عن آخر يقتصر على الرئيس وحده، الذي يحتفظ بحق الفيتو لإجهاض أي اقتراح يتقدم به أحد أعضاء إدارته، فالرئيس هو المسؤول الأول والأخير أمام الشعب الذي انتخبه، ومن الملاحظ أن التقارب الأخير الشديد بين ترمب وإيلون ماسك قد فرضته الظروف الانتخابية التي أوصلت ترمب للبيت الأبيض، حيث يرى ماسك أن دعمه للرئيس كان أحد الأسباب التي أوصلت الرئيس للبيت الأبيض.
ربما اعتقد ماسك في قرارة نفسه أنه السيد الحقيقي للبيت الأبيض، ولعل وزارة الكفاءة التي تم تعيينه وزيراً لها تعد مخرجاتها من أصعب القرارات وأكثرها أهمية كونها تتعلق بالإنفاق الحكومي، ومن يقود مثل هذه الوزارة يجب أن يدرك أنه يسير على حبل مشدود، يجب عليه أن يتوازن تماماً حتى لا يميل يمنة أو يسرة فيفقد توازنه ويتخذ قرارات خاطئة تؤذي الجميع، غير أن ماسك -رجل الأعمال- لم يجد طريقاً أفضل لرفع كفاءة الإنفاق الحكومي من فصل الموظفين ورفع الدعم عن السلع الأساسية، وكأنه يدير مؤسسة تجارية، غير أن هذه القرارات لم تأخذ في الحسبان العديد من الأبعاد التي تتصادم وعلى نحو جوهري مع وعود ترمب الانتخابية.
إن أي رئيس أمريكي في حال اتخاذه قراراً خاطئاً قد يواجه بموجة عارمة من الانتقادات داخل العديد من أروقة المؤسسات السياسية الأمريكية وخاصة الكونجرس، التي قد تصل لحد المطالبة بسحب الثقة منه بدعوى أن قراراته قد تتسبب في الإضرار بمصالح الشعب الأمريكي، غير أن ماسك أغفل هذا الأمر تماماً اعتقاداً منه أنه يمكن أن يدير الأمر بمنطق الربح والخسارة، غير أن الدول تدار بمنطق مختلف تماماً، فهي لا بد أن تأخذ في اعتبارها العديد من العوامل الاجتماعية ومصالح الشعوب.
إن قانون الموازنة الذي أقره ترمب ووجده ماسك متعارضاً مع منهجه الإداري، لم يناقشه الأخير بهدوء بل سارع بتوجيه اللوم العنيف لمشروع القرار وانتقده بشدة، وهنا بدأت سلسلة جديدة من الصراعات انتهت بخروج ماسك من البيت الأبيض، ومن المؤسف أن يعتقد بعض المرؤوسين أنه بإمكانهم فرض آرائهم على رؤسائهم، وهو اعتقاد منبعه امتلاء الشخص بالغرور، ولاسيما لو سيطرت عليهم فكرة مفادها أن دعمهم للرئيس هو سبب نجاحه، وبالتالي يقومون بالتلويح بمثل هذه الورقة.
لم يتمكن ماسك خلال الأشهر القليلة التي قضاها داخل البيت الأبيض من أن يتعلم أن إدارة الدول تختلف جوهرياً عن إدارة مؤسساته التجارية، التي صنع منها إمبراطورية اقتصادية عملاقة جعلته أغنى رجل في العالم، فهو لم يتمكن من إدراك أن الدول لا يمكنها أن تدار إلا من خلال عقل وفكر رئيس واحد فقط، هو من يملك الشرعية لإقرار ما يراه صالحاً لتنفيذ مشروعه التنموي، وتحقيق وعوده الانتخابية. ولعل ماسك هدف من وراء دعمه لترمب ولحزبه الجمهوري تعظيم ثروته من خلال تحالف الثروة والنفوذ معاً، غير أنه على ما يبدو أن طموحاته قد تبخرت على صخرة رفض الرئيس الأمريكي قراراته وتوصياته، مما دفعه لأن ينقلب على رئيسه بعنف ولا أحد يعلم إلى أين سينتهي الأمر.
تابع قناة عكاظ على الواتساب
There are many clashes that occur between a leader and their subordinate, whether this leader is the head of an institution or a state. There are numerous reasons that lead to such clashes, but they generally revolve around differing visions and viewpoints between them. However, there is a fundamental factor that can amplify these conflicts and contribute to reaching a point of no return, which is the personal nature of each individual and their personal ambitions. High ambitions may push their owner into conflicts from which only they will suffer losses.
In party-based states like the United States and others, where the winning party in elections holds the majority, many constraints are imposed on the elected president. These constraints are dictated by reality and the electoral promises they made to themselves. This situation becomes even more complicated in a country like the United States, where Congress (and the controlling party) governs the decision-making process. The president in the United States needs the support of their party members to pass some of their presidential decisions, which complicates matters for any American president during their management of the country's affairs.
There is no doubt that members of the American administration and government have varying visions that may agree or disagree among themselves. However, the final say in favoring one opinion over another rests solely with the president, who retains the veto power to abort any proposal put forward by one of their administration members. The president is the primary and final responsible party before the people who elected them. It is noteworthy that the recent close relationship between Trump and Elon Musk was imposed by the electoral circumstances that brought Trump to the White House, as Musk believes that his support for the president was one of the reasons that led to the president's election.
Musk may have believed deep down that he was the true master of the White House, and perhaps the Ministry of Efficiency, for which he was appointed minister, produces some of the most difficult and important decisions related to government spending. Anyone leading such a ministry must realize that they are walking on a tightrope, needing to maintain perfect balance to avoid leaning too far in either direction, which could lead to losing balance and making wrong decisions that harm everyone. However, Musk—the businessman—found no better way to enhance government spending efficiency than by laying off employees and cutting subsidies for essential goods, as if he were managing a commercial enterprise. Yet, these decisions did not take into account many dimensions that fundamentally clash with Trump's electoral promises.
Any American president, if they make a wrong decision, may face a tidal wave of criticism within many corridors of American political institutions, especially Congress, which could reach the point of calling for a vote of no confidence on the grounds that their decisions could harm the interests of the American people. However, Musk completely overlooked this matter, believing that he could manage things with a profit-and-loss mentality, while countries are managed with a completely different logic, as they must consider many social factors and the interests of the people.
The budget law that Trump approved and which Musk found to be in conflict with his management approach was not discussed calmly by Musk; instead, he quickly directed harsh blame towards the draft decision and criticized it severely. This marked the beginning of a new series of conflicts that ended with Musk's exit from the White House. It is unfortunate that some subordinates believe they can impose their opinions on their leaders, a belief stemming from a person's arrogance, especially if they are dominated by the idea that their support for the president is the reason for his success, and thus they wave such a card.
During the few months Musk spent in the White House, he was unable to learn that managing countries is fundamentally different from managing his commercial enterprises, from which he built a giant economic empire that made him the richest man in the world. He failed to realize that countries can only be managed through the mind and thought of one president, who has the legitimacy to approve what they deem fit for implementing their developmental project and fulfilling their electoral promises. Perhaps Musk aimed, through his support for Trump and the Republican Party, to amplify his wealth through a combination of wealth and influence. However, it seems that his ambitions have evaporated against the rock of the American president's rejection of his decisions and recommendations, prompting him to violently turn against his president, and no one knows where this will end.
In party-based states like the United States and others, where the winning party in elections holds the majority, many constraints are imposed on the elected president. These constraints are dictated by reality and the electoral promises they made to themselves. This situation becomes even more complicated in a country like the United States, where Congress (and the controlling party) governs the decision-making process. The president in the United States needs the support of their party members to pass some of their presidential decisions, which complicates matters for any American president during their management of the country's affairs.
There is no doubt that members of the American administration and government have varying visions that may agree or disagree among themselves. However, the final say in favoring one opinion over another rests solely with the president, who retains the veto power to abort any proposal put forward by one of their administration members. The president is the primary and final responsible party before the people who elected them. It is noteworthy that the recent close relationship between Trump and Elon Musk was imposed by the electoral circumstances that brought Trump to the White House, as Musk believes that his support for the president was one of the reasons that led to the president's election.
Musk may have believed deep down that he was the true master of the White House, and perhaps the Ministry of Efficiency, for which he was appointed minister, produces some of the most difficult and important decisions related to government spending. Anyone leading such a ministry must realize that they are walking on a tightrope, needing to maintain perfect balance to avoid leaning too far in either direction, which could lead to losing balance and making wrong decisions that harm everyone. However, Musk—the businessman—found no better way to enhance government spending efficiency than by laying off employees and cutting subsidies for essential goods, as if he were managing a commercial enterprise. Yet, these decisions did not take into account many dimensions that fundamentally clash with Trump's electoral promises.
Any American president, if they make a wrong decision, may face a tidal wave of criticism within many corridors of American political institutions, especially Congress, which could reach the point of calling for a vote of no confidence on the grounds that their decisions could harm the interests of the American people. However, Musk completely overlooked this matter, believing that he could manage things with a profit-and-loss mentality, while countries are managed with a completely different logic, as they must consider many social factors and the interests of the people.
The budget law that Trump approved and which Musk found to be in conflict with his management approach was not discussed calmly by Musk; instead, he quickly directed harsh blame towards the draft decision and criticized it severely. This marked the beginning of a new series of conflicts that ended with Musk's exit from the White House. It is unfortunate that some subordinates believe they can impose their opinions on their leaders, a belief stemming from a person's arrogance, especially if they are dominated by the idea that their support for the president is the reason for his success, and thus they wave such a card.
During the few months Musk spent in the White House, he was unable to learn that managing countries is fundamentally different from managing his commercial enterprises, from which he built a giant economic empire that made him the richest man in the world. He failed to realize that countries can only be managed through the mind and thought of one president, who has the legitimacy to approve what they deem fit for implementing their developmental project and fulfilling their electoral promises. Perhaps Musk aimed, through his support for Trump and the Republican Party, to amplify his wealth through a combination of wealth and influence. However, it seems that his ambitions have evaporated against the rock of the American president's rejection of his decisions and recommendations, prompting him to violently turn against his president, and no one knows where this will end.


